I do think though that the issue of participating in sexual relations to promote your career is a different issue than just whether someone had an affair or not.
The lefties want to have a large, large examination of how sexual relations - alleged or real- are used in the workplace to advance or limit a persons career.
Fine. Kamala Harris's actions are properly examined in that light as well. Having an affair with a married man pretty much goes to just a moral issue and people may decide to just mind their own business or condemn her, however their mind or moral system works in the voting booth. I dont really care a lot about that. But when an unknown, inexperienced bird-braid woman starts having an affair with power politician who suddenly then concludes that she is the right person to be appointed to two EXTREMELY high-paid, do-nothing, meetings twice a month, jobs then that makes it a public policy and candidate integrity/background issue that has a whole nuther dimension beyond just the personal or moral life of someone. Maybe she was not a victim because she ended out as a winner so who is going to cry for her? Well, how did the qualified women OR THE MEN who were not willing to suck Willie's dick to get the job make out? Any victims of the process there? And did Willie pay her with his money or the taxpayer's money to get the voters the "best, most qualified person for the job." Where "most-qualified" is defined as sucking Willie's dick.
So I am somewhat of a moderate on the Kamala thing, in that I agree that the line between sinners/saints is mighty thin when it comes to just the moral dimension so there is not much to be gained by people who pile on morally because she was screwing a married man. I most definitely, however, do not believe that people who want to give weight or examination to her alleged credentials, career path, participation in sex power games in the workplace, etc are inappropriately piling on to poor Kamala. She has an appetite that is wide and deep for examining others as does her wing of the party. Nor do I believe the crapola that says that just looking at those issues is sexist because if it were a man people would just shrug.
Or to put it another way, I am willing to overlook her behavior and career advancement "coincidences" to the same extent that she would have been willing to overlook it in Kavanaugh if there had been any evidence that his law clerks suddenly were appointed after they had sex with him or an extra-marital relationship with him.